Sentence examples for divergence in the depth from inspiring English sources

When we fix the proboscis length of pollinators (proboscis length is assigned to individuals at random, independently of the proboscis length of their parents, using the same probability distribution at each generation), there is absolutely no divergence in the depth of corolla tubes following 10000 generations (Fig. 4A).

In our comparative study within Ensatina, while we find a good qualitative agreement between mitochondrial and nuclear markers (i.e. major mtDNA lineages encompass distinct nDNA genetic clusters), we also find a quantitative disagreement in the depth of genetic divergence across pairs of populations.

Once the two pollinator species differ in tongue length, divergence in corolla-tube depth between the two plant species ensues.

However, it is important to notice that the positioning of the FOV using a single projection is prone to error because of the summing of attenuation structures in the depth direction and divergence of the beam [23].

Under these conditions, there is character displacement, and divergence in corolla-tube depth between the two plant species ensues [16].

Flowers of species A, which are most effectively pollinated by moths of species X, have slightly deeper corolla tubes than flowers of species B after ten generations, but the difference is small and remains so for about 1000 generations, when the real divergence in corolla-tube depth takes place.

The value of δ does not affect the differences in corolla-tube depth and proboscis length following 20000 generations (Fig. 5), but the rate of evolution does depend on δ: the lower the value of δ, the longer it takes for divergence in corolla-tube depth to get started (Fig. 6).

The lack of divergence in corolla-tube depth with these parameter values cannot be attributed to a delayed response.

The idea that character displacement, due to the foraging strategies of pollinators, promotes divergence in corolla-tube depth is related to two of the previously proposed hypotheses: that deep corollas evolve to promote flower constancy [20] and that they contribute to exclude unwanted visitors [13] [14].

This, in turn, has an effect on the evolution of corolla-tube depth: when the two moth species have similar proboscis lengths, there is little divergence in corolla-tube depth (Fig. 9).

If the cost is similar for the two species, proboscis length does not diverge, individual moths do not specialise on flowers with one corolla-tube depth, there is no selective fertilizing within plants and there is no evolutionary pressure for divergence in corolla-tube depth.